Segmentation of e-customers in terms of sustainable last-mile delivery

Abstract

Research background: A rapidly developing e-commerce market and growing customer expectations regarding the speed and frequency of deliveries have made the last mile of the supply chain more challenging. The expectations of e-customers increase every year. They choose those companies that deliver goods faster and cheaper than others. A significant group of customers in Poland still selects home delivery. Many of them frequently return products to the retailer. These expectations and behaviour pose a challenge for the transport companies to deliver parcels to individual customers soon after the purchase, sometimes even on the same day. In addition, increasingly frequent deliveries contribute to environmental pollution, congestion, and accidents, as well as more expensive deliveries.

Purpose of the article: The paper aims to identify e-customers? preferences and assess their impact on sustainable last-mile delivery (LMD) in the e-commerce market. The authors have also identified factors influencing e-customers? behaviour to make last-mile delivery more sustainable.

Methods: The conjoint analysis was applied to evaluate a set of profiles defined by selected attributes in order to investigate the overall preferences for the profiles created by the respondents to the survey.

Findings & value added: The segmentation of e-customers according to their preferences connected with last-mile delivery was presented. The added value of the paper is the presentation of the methodology to assess the impact of customer preferences on sustainable last-mile delivery. The obtained results may contribute to the formulation of recommendations for e-commerce and logistics companies regarding the preferences of e-customers to improve the sustainability of last-mile delivery.

Keywords

e-commerce, conjoint analysis, sustainability, sustainable logistics, ecological awareness

References

1. Agatz, N., Fan, Y., & Stam, D. (2020). Going green: the effect of green labels on delivery time slot choices. Available at SSRN, 3656982. doi: 10.2139/SSRN.3 656982. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3656982
   View in Google Scholar
2. Bartłomowicz, T., & Bąk, A. (2019). The conjoint R package as a tool for measur-ing stated preferences. Informatyka Ekonomiczna. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 2(52), 9?28. doi: 10.15611/ie.201 9.2.01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15611/ie.2019.2.01
   View in Google Scholar
3. Bąk, A., & Bartłomowicz, T. (2012). Conjoint analysis method and its implemen-tation in conjoint R package. In J. Pociecha (Ed.). Data analysis methods and its application. Warsaw: C.H. Beck Publishers, 239?248.
   View in Google Scholar
4. Berenguer, J., Corraliza, J. A., & Martin, R. (2005). Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 128. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.128
   View in Google Scholar
5. Browne, M., Allen, J., Woodburn, A., & Piotrowska, M. (2014). The potential for non-road modes to support environmentally friendly urban logistics. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 151, 29?36. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.20 14.10.005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.005
   View in Google Scholar
6. Buerke, A., Straatmann, T., Lin-Hi, N., & Müller, K. (2017). Consumer awareness and sustainability-focused value orientation as motivating factors of responsi-ble consumer behavior. Review of Managerial Science, 11(4), 959?991. doi: 10.10 07/S11846-016-0211-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0211-2
   View in Google Scholar
7. Caspersen, E., & Navrud, S. (2021). The sharing economy and consumer prefer-ences for environmentally sustainable last mile deliveries. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 95, 102863. doi: 10.1016/j.trd. 2021.102863. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102863
   View in Google Scholar
8. Caspersen, E., Navrud, S., & Bengtsson, J. (2022). Act locally? Are female online shoppers willing to pay to reduce the carbon footprint of last mile deliveries? International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 16(12), 1144?f1158. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2021.1975326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2021.1975326
   View in Google Scholar
9. Collins, A. (2015). Travel behaviour in the context of parcel pick-ups. Retrived from https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/19270 (20.08.2022).
   View in Google Scholar
10. da Silva, J. V. S., Vaz de Magalh?es, D. J. A., & Medrado, L. (2019). Demand analysis for pick-up sites as an alternative solution for home delivery in the Brazilian context. Transportation Research Procedia, 39, 462?470. doi: 10.101 6/j.trpro.2019.06.048. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2019.06.048
    View in Google Scholar
11. Deutsch, Y., & Golany, B. (2018). A parcel locker network as a solution to the logistics last mile problem. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1-2), 251?261.doi: 10.1080/00207543.2017.1395490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1395490
    View in Google Scholar
12. European Commission (2019). The European Green Deal. European Commission. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
    View in Google Scholar
13. European Commission (2011). White paper. Roadmap to a single European transport area ? towards a competitive and resource efficient transport sys-tem. European Commission.
    View in Google Scholar
14. Frajtova Michalikova, K., Blazek, R., & Rydell, L. (2022). Delivery apps use during the COVID-19 pandemic: consumer satisfaction judgments, behavioral intentions, and purchase decisions. Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, 17(1), 70?82. doi: 10.22381/emfm17120225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22381/emfm17120225
    View in Google Scholar
15. Gatta, V., Marcucci, E., Nigro, M., Patella, S., & Serafini, S. (2018). Public transport-based crowdshipping for sustainable city logistics: assessing eco-nomic and environmental impacts. Sustainability, 11, 145. doi: 10.3390/su11010 145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010145
    View in Google Scholar
16. Gatta, V., Marcucci, E., Nigro, M., & Serafini, S. (2019). Sustainable urban freight transport adopting public transport-based crowdshipping for B2C de-liveries. European Transport Research Review, 11(1), 1?14. doi: 10.1186/s12544-019-0352-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-019-0352-x
    View in Google Scholar
17. Gonzalez-Calderon, C. A., Posada-Henao, J. J., Granada-Mu?oz, C. A., Moreno-Palacio, D. P., & Arcila-Mena, G. (2022). Cargo bicycles as an alternative to make sustainable last-mile deliveries in Medellin, Colombia. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 10(2), 1172?1187. doi: 10.1016/j.cstp.2022.04.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2022.04.006
    View in Google Scholar
18. Goodchild, A., & Toy, J. (2018). Delivery by drone: an evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle technology in reducing CO2 emissions in the delivery service industry. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 61, 58?67. doi: 10.1016/J.TRD.2017.02.017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.02.017
    View in Google Scholar
19. Guo, J., Hao, H., Wang, M., & Liu, Z. (2022). An empirical study on consumers? willingness to buy agricultural products online and its influencing factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 336, 130403. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13 0403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130403
    View in Google Scholar
20. Hagen, T., & Scheel-Kopeinig, S. (2021). Would customers be willing to use an alternative (chargeable) delivery concept for the last mile? Research in Transportation Business & Management, 39, 100626. doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.20 21.100626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100626
    View in Google Scholar
21. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings. Prentce; Englewood Cliff.
    View in Google Scholar
22. Iannaccone, G., Marcucci, E., & Gatta, V. (2021). What young e-consumers want? Forecasting parcel lockers choice in Rome. Logistics, 5, 57. doi: 10.3390/logisti cs5030057. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics5030057
    View in Google Scholar
23. Ignat, B., & Chankov, S. (2020). Do e-commerce customers change their pre-ferred last-mile delivery based on its sustainability impact? International Journal of Logistics Management, 31(3), 521?548. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-11-2019-0305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-11-2019-0305
    View in Google Scholar
24. Iwan, S., Kijewska, K., & Lemke, J. (2016). Analysis of parcel lockers? efficiency as the last mile delivery solution?the results of the research in Poland. Transportation Research Procedia, 12, 644?655. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2016.0 2.018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.02.018
    View in Google Scholar
25. Jaller, M., Pineda, L., Ambrose, H., & Kendall, A. (2021). Empirical analysis of the role of incentives in zero-emission last-mile deliveries in California. Journal of Cleaner Production, 317, 128353. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.1 28353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128353
    View in Google Scholar
26. Janßen, D., & Langen, N. (2017). The bunch of sustainability labels ? do consum-ers differentiate? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 1233?1245. doi: 10.1016 /J.JCLEPRO.2016.11.171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.171
    View in Google Scholar
27. Joerss, B. M., Neuhaus, F., & Schroder, J. (2016). How customer demands are reshaping last-mile delivery. McKinsey Quarterly, October 19.
    View in Google Scholar
28. Kapser, S., & Abdelrahman, M. (2020). Acceptance of autonomous delivery vehi-cles for last-mile delivery in Germany?Extending UTAUT2 with risk percep-tions. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 111, 210?225. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2019.12.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2019.12.016
    View in Google Scholar
29. Kiba-Janiak, M., Marcinkowski, J., Jagoda, A., & Skowrońska, A. (2021). Sus-tainable last mile delivery on e-commerce market in cities from the perspec-tive of various stakeholders. Literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 71, 102984. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.102984. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102984
    View in Google Scholar
30. Krstić, M., Tadić, S., Kovač, M., Roso, V., & Zečević, S. (2021). A novel Hybrid MCDM Model for the evaluation of sustainable last mile solutions. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021. doi: 10.1155/2021/5969788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5969788
    View in Google Scholar
31. Lee, H. L., Chen, Y., Gillai, B., & Rammohan, S. (2016). Technological disrup-tion and innovation in last-mile delivery. White Paper. Stanford value chain innovation initiative in collaboration with United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General. Stanford Business School. Retrieved from https://www.gsb .stanford.edu/sites/gsb/files/publication-pdf/vcii-publication-technological-disr uption-innovation-last-mile-delivery.pdf.
    View in Google Scholar
32. Lemardelé, C., & Estrada, M. (2021). Does size really matter? Dual distribution channel with vans and autonomous delivery devices. Transportation Research Procedia, 58, 262?269. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2021.11.036. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2021.11.036
    View in Google Scholar
33. Lemke, J., Iwan, S., & Korczak, J. (2016). Usability of the parcel lockers from the customer perspective ? the research in Polish cities. Transportation Research Procedia, 16, 272?287. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.027
    View in Google Scholar
34. Lenz, B., & Riehle, E. (2013). Bikes for urban freight? Experience in Europe. Transportation Research Record, 2379(1), 39?45. doi: 10.3141/2379-05. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3141/2379-05
    View in Google Scholar
35. Mangiaracina, R., Perego, A., Perotti, S., & Tumino, A. (2016). Assessing the environmental impact of logistics in online and offline B2C purchasing pro-cesses in the apparel industry. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 23(1), 98?124. doi: 10.1504/IJLSM.2016.073300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLSM.2016.073300
    View in Google Scholar
36. Marcucci, E., Gatta, V., Marciani, M., & Cossu, P. (2017). Measuring the effects of an urban freight policy package defined via a collaborative governance model. Research in Transportation Economics, 65, 3?9. doi: 10.1016/j.retrec.2017. 09.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2017.09.001
    View in Google Scholar
37. Morganti, E., Seidel, S., Blanquart, C., Dablanc, L., & Lenz, B. (2014). The im-pact of e-commerce on final deliveries: alternative parcel delivery services in France and Germany. Transportation Research Procedia, 4, 178?190. doi: 10.1016/j.t rpro.2014.11.014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2014.11.014
    View in Google Scholar
38. Mucowska, M. (2021). Trends of environmentally sustainable solutions of urban last-mile deliveries on the e-commerce market?a literature review. Sustainability, 13, 5894. doi: 10.3390/su13115894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115894
    View in Google Scholar
39. Nguyen, D. H., De Leeuw, S., Dullaert, W., & Foubert, B. P. (2019). What is the right delivery option for you? Consumer preferences for delivery attributes in online retailing. Journal of Business Logistics, 40(4), 299?321. doi: 10.1111/ jbl.12210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12210
    View in Google Scholar
40. Nogueira, G. P. M., de Assis Rangel, J. J., & Shimoda, E. (2021). Sustainable last-mile distribution in B2C e-commerce: do consumers really care? Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 3, 100021. doi: 10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100021
    View in Google Scholar
41. Norell, V., & Gammelgaard, B. (2020). Consumer expectations and the interna-tionalisation of e-commerce giants PostNord-From traditional mail to a leader within e-commerce. Effektivitet, 1, 8?10.
    View in Google Scholar
42. Novotná, M., Švadlenka, L., Jovčić, S., & Simić, V. (2022). Micro-hub location selection for sustainable last-mile delivery. Plos one, 17(7), e0270926. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270926. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270926
    View in Google Scholar
43. Oliveira, L. K. D., Oliveira, R. L. M. D., Sousa, L. T. M. D., Caliari, I. D. P., & Nascimento, C. D. O. L. (2019). Analysis of accessibility from collection and delivery points: towards the sustainability of the e-commerce delivery. urbe. Revista Brasileira de Gest?o Urbana, 11. doi: 10.1590/2175-3369.011.e2019 0048. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-3369.011.e20190048
    View in Google Scholar
44. Orzoł, M., & Szopik-Depczyńska, K. (2022). E-commerce and the development of communication infrastructure in Poland. Procedia Computer Science, 207, 3957?3968. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.458
    View in Google Scholar
45. Poliak, M., Svabova, L., Konecny, V., Zhuravleva, N. A., & Culik, K. (2021). New paradigms of quantification of economic efficiency in the transport sector. Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(1), 193?212. doi: 10.24136/oc.2021.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2021.008
    View in Google Scholar
46. Polinori, P., Marcucci, E., Bollino, C. A., Bigerna, S., & Gatta, V. (2018). Eco-labeling and sustainable urban freight transport: how much are people willing to pay for green logistics? International Journal of Transport Economics, 45(4), 631?658. doi: 10.19272/201806704006.
    View in Google Scholar
47. Punel, A., Ermagun, A., & Stathopoulos, A. (2018). Studying determinants of crowd-shipping use. Travel Behaviour and Society, 12, 30?40. doi: 10.1016/ j.tbs.2018.03.005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2018.03.005
    View in Google Scholar
48. Puram, P., Gurumurthy, A., Narmetta, M., & Mor, R. S. (2021). Last-mile chal-lenges in on-demand food delivery during COVID-19: understanding the rid-ers? perspective using a grounded theory approach. International Journal of Logistics Management, 33(3), 901?925. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0024
    View in Google Scholar
49. Rai, H. B., Broekaert, C., Verlinde, S., & Macharis, C. (2021a). Sharing is caring: How non-financial incentives drive sustainable e-commerce delivery. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 93, 102794. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2021).102794. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102794
    View in Google Scholar
50. Rai, H. B., Mommens, K., Verlinde, S., & Macharis, C. (2019). How does con-sumers? omnichannel shopping behaviour translate into travel and transport impacts? Case-study of a footwear retailer in Belgium. Sustainability, 11(9), 2534. doi: 10.3390/su11092534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092534
    View in Google Scholar
51. Rai, H. B., Verlinde, S., & Macharis, C. (2021b). Who is interested in a crowdsourced last mile? A segmentation of attitudinal profiles. Travel Behaviour and Society, 22, 22?31. doi: 10.1016/j.tbs.2020.08.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.08.004
    View in Google Scholar
52. Rai, H. B., Verlinde, S., & Macharis, C. (2021c). Unlocking the failed delivery problem? Opportunities and challenges for smart locks from a consumer per-spective. Research in Transportation Economics, 87, 100753. doi: 10.1016/j. retrec.2019.100753. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2019.100753
    View in Google Scholar
53. Rajesh, B. P., & Rajan, J. A. (2020). Sustainable performance of cargo bikes to improve the delivery time using traffic simulation model. FME Transactions, 48(2), 411?418. doi: 10.5937/fme2002411R. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/fme2002411R
    View in Google Scholar
54. Savelsbergh, M., & Van Woensel, T. (2016). 50th anniversary invited article?city logistics: challenges and opportunities. Transportation Science, 50(2), 579?590. doi: 10.1287/trsc.2016.0675. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2016.0675
    View in Google Scholar
55. Stefko, R., Bacik, R., Fedorko, R., & Olearova, M. (2022). Gender-generation characteristic in relation to the customer behavior and purchasing process in terms of mobile marketing. Oeconomia Copernicana, 13(1), 181?223. doi: 10.24136/oc.2022.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2022.006
    View in Google Scholar
56. Srinivas, S. S., & Marathe, R. R. (2021). Moving towards ?mobile warehouse?: Last-mile logistics during COVID-19 and beyond. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 10, 100339. doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2021.100339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100339
    View in Google Scholar
57. Taniguchi, E., Thompson, R. G., & Yamada, T. (2016). New opportunities and challenges for city logistics. Transportation Research Procedia, 12, 5?13. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2016.02.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.02.004
    View in Google Scholar
58. Tolentino-Zondervan, F., Bogers, E., & van de Sande, L. (2021). A managerial and behavioral approach in aligning stakeholder goals in sustainable last mile logistics: a case study in The Netherlands. Sustainability, 13(8), 4434. doi: doi.org/10.3390/su13084434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084434
    View in Google Scholar
59. Vakulenko, Y., Hellström, D., & Hjort, K. (2018). What?s in the parcel locker? Exploring customer value in e-commerce last mile delivery. Journal of Business Research, 88, 421?427. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.033
    View in Google Scholar
60. van Loon, P., Deketele, L., Dewaele, J., McKinnon, A., & Rutherford, C. (2015). A comparative analysis of carbon emissions from online retailing of fast mov-ing consumer goods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 478?486. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.060
    View in Google Scholar
61. Wang, X., Yuen, K. F., Wong, Y. D., & Teo, C. C. (2018). An innovation diffusion perspective of e-consumers? initial adoption of self-collection service via au-tomated parcel station. International Journal of Logistics Management, 29(1), 237?260. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-12-2016-0302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-12-2016-0302
    View in Google Scholar
62. Wicki, M., Brückmann, G., & Bernauer, T. (2022). How to accelerate the uptake of electric cars? Insights from a choice experiment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 355, 131774. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022. 131774. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131774
    View in Google Scholar
63. Wind, J., & Green, P. E. (1975). A new way to measure consumer judgments. Harvard Business Review, 53, 107?117.
    View in Google Scholar
64. Yamane, T., & Kaneko, S. (2021). Is the younger generation a driving force to-ward achieving the sustainable development goals? Survey experiments. Jour-nal of Cleaner Production, 292, 125932. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.125932. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125932
    View in Google Scholar
65. Yoo, W., Yu, E., & Jung, J. (2018). Drone delivery: factors affecting the public?s attitude and intention to adopt. Telematics and Informatics, 35(6), 1687?1700. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.04.014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.04.014
    View in Google Scholar
66. Yuen, K. F., Wang, X., Ma, F., & Wong, Y. D. (2019). The determinants of cus-tomers? intention to use smart lockers for last-mile deliveries. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 316?326. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019 .03.022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.022
    View in Google Scholar
67. Yuen, K. F., Wang, X., Ng, L. T. W., & Wong, Y. D. (2018). An investigation of customers? intention to use self-collection services for last-mile delivery. Transport Policy, 66, 1?8. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.03.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.03.001
    View in Google Scholar
68. Zhou, L., Baldacci, R., Vigo, D., & Wang, X. (2018). A multi-depot two-echelon vehicle routing problem with delivery options arising in the last mile distribu-tion. European Journal of Operational Research, 265(2), 765?778. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.011
    View in Google Scholar
69. Zvarikova, K., Gajanova, L., & Higgins, M. (2022). Adoption of delivery apps during the COVID-19 crisis: consumer perceived value, behavioral choices, and purchase intentions. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 10(1), 69?81. doi: 10.22381/jsme10120225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22381/jsme1012025
    View in Google Scholar